Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1887-12-02
OPINIONS AND SUITS.
ANUMBER OF DECISIONS FROM THR su.
PREME COURT oP APPEALS
Proceedings Yesterday in Several OF the
Richmond Tribunals OF Justice
Telegraph Case.

Richmond Tribunals OF Justice
Telegraph Case.
Thursday the oath was THANKSGIVING
Day, and the Supreme Court of Appeals
did not SIT. and consequently number
= OF opioions which were ready were not
made public. On yesterday, therefore,
there WIS a double lot. According to
the rccently-adoptod custom each Judge
read one opinion and each of the other
opinions was handed down TO the clerk
with the simple announcement of the
style oi the case, name of the court from
which 1T came, and the word reversed
or = affirmed, as the case might be.
The court has now the docket under
complete control. and will have swept it
clean very nearly when they get ready
to adjourn at the end of the spring term.
Yesterday they gave notice that they
would adjourn for this term on the 9th
of December.
Following are the cases decided yes
tcrdoy:
CONVEYANCE SIT ASIDE.
Fishbune Us. Ferguson. From the
Circuit Court Of Franklin. Affirmed,
Judge Lewis delivering the opinion
Judges Fauntleroy and Richardson dis
senting
In this case the court held that the
decedent, Ferguson, WIS nOa conlpUs
H'cn'is by reason of inGrmity when the
conveyance IN question was made, and
that undue influence was exerted to cause
bim TO make it; also that there was
inadequate consideration.
The opinion is a lengthy and able one,
and discusses all the questions raised
and they are of frequent occurrence-in
the light OF the latest authorities.
REINSURANCE-NO NOTICE OF CANCELLATION. /
Mutual Assurance Society of Virginia
rs. The Scottish Union and National In
,urance Company. From the Circuit
Court of the city of Richmond. Re
ycrsed, Judge Lacy delivering the
opinion.
Here it was held that notice of cancel
latjon Of policy given Claiborne &
Sons. insurance agents, was not sufli-
Gent that by the terms of the contract
the notice should have been given the as
aurcd or their agent. Though it was
proved that there had been a custom
here TO notify the agents who had ef- |
iectcd the insurance or reinsurance, the /
court held that no usage could control /
the rules Of law or vary an express con |
tract The notice should have been to /
the assured or their agent ; and though !
there was a provision IN the policy that |
The insurance brokers should be cOnsid- /
cred the agents of the insurer and as
surcd. tie count construed that as mean
ing agents for the plac.-g OF the insu-
rance and not for the purpose here /
brought in question.
DAMAGES AGAINST A RAILROAD.
Richmond and Danvile Railroad Com
panv ~. Norment. From the Circuit /
tonrt OF Richmond. Affirmed, Judge 7
Richardson delivering the opinion
Judge Fauntleroy filing a dissenting .
opinion.
In this case 8. f. Norment who Was .
employed as an ovcrhaulcr ut the Danyille .
depot yard, on the 2dof March was under /
acarwhich stood on brancht'ack putting
IN q drawbar spring While thus en-
mgcd cars that were being shifted were
driven against the car which was being
repaired. Mr.. Noment's hand was
caught between the drawhar and spring
seat. mashing il badly and causing the
loss of one finger ana potion OF
smother. Mr. Normcnt brought suit T.
qeainst the railroad company in the
Circuit Court and was awarded ;3, $50
The railroad company took the case to
tine Supreme Court, resulting as above
stated.
JOSTs VERSUS FINCH
Jones rs. Finch. From the Circuit
Court Of Richmond. Reversed Judge .
Richardson delivering the opinion.
Jones is colorcd man, who was
formerly postmaster Of Boydton and f.
afterwards a member of the house Of
Delegates. This suit is the outgrowih .
of the canvass two years ago, when Jones .
was accused Of having stolen letter
FROM the mails and when there were
various other charges against him. As .
to the letter business Jones was examined /
by q United States Commissioner and /
discharged Having brought suit against |
Mr Finch for SANDER, libel, and mali
ci0us prosecution, the defendant insisted |
that the action of the United States .
Commissioner was not a determination /
of the question before him that the /
grand iury could still indict, &c. This /
view Judge Wexford sustained, and the /
case went of on that point: but the |
supreme Court oveuulcd Judge Welt |
fori-holdue that for the purposes of |
Tins litigation the question before the !
United States Commissioner was deter !
miued. Now the case is returned to .
Judge Wcliiord for "a new trial.
AIINOSY.
Cralle rs. Crallc. From the Circuit .
+ Court OF Nottoway. Affirmed in part .
and reversed in pant. Judge Lewis de- .
hycrug the opinion.
This vas a question of alimony-when /
payment Of it should begin and out OF /
what property it should he paid.
Tie court held here tina; the earnings .
F on the husband, divorced az the suit of '
f the wife. vas rs much subject Of charge .
as any otner Of his assets or property
oumE CASES.
puqcer rs. Duggcr From the Cor /
poration Court OF Danvillo. Reversed, /
Judge Faunt.cIoy delivering the opinion.
"a. y. Stokes a Co. lose a considerable |
debt by TINS deciaionl.
Graycley as. Grayelcy. From the /
Corporation Codrt of Danville. Re-
versed, Judge Richardson delivering the /
opinion. 1
Kerr rs. Kerr. From the Circuit of .
Augusta Affirmed, Judge Hinton de
lyeIiug the opinion.
McAIter ys. Grgesey. From the Cir /
cult Court OF Loudoun. Reversed, |
Judge Lacy delivering the opinion.
Eggleton as. Whittlo receiver From .
the circuit Count of Henry. Affirmed, /
Judge Fauntleroy delivering the opin-